SUBSCRIBE:

Share

(Human Rights Watch/IFEX) - New York, May 7, 2010 - The Indian government should not equate peaceful political speech with criminal acts while conducting its operations against armed Maoist groups, Human Rights Watch said today.

The Indian government appears to have threatened to curb the right to freedom of expression by treating it as equivalent to providing material or physical support for criminal acts by the proscribed Communist Party of India (Maoist), also known as Naxalites, which the government has banned.

"The Indian government should think twice before trying to silence political discussion and demanding endorsement of its views on Maoist groups," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The recent views expressed by the Indian government against so-called sympathizers could be understood as carte blanche by local authorities to harass and arrest critics of Indian government policy."

On May 6, 2010, the Home Ministry issued a statement saying that, "It has come to the notice of the government that some Maoist leaders have been directly contacting certain NGOs and intellectuals to propagate their ideology and persuade them to take steps which would provide support to the CPI (Maoist) ideology." Government officials warned members of civil society that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, which calls for imprisonment of up to 10 years, could be used to punish individuals in contact with the Maoists. Home Minister P. Chidambaram had earlier called upon civil society demanding "voices of condemnation of those who have, erroneously, extended intellectual and material support to the CPI (Maoist)."

The Maoists claim to speak for the rights of the marginalized, including landless peasants, tribal groups, and Dalits. Maoists have been responsible for serious abuses, including the destruction of schools and hospitals, extortion, torture, and killings. The Indian government has acknowledged that the failure of the government to provide adequate services and development opportunities has led to disaffection and support for the Maoists in some areas.

The Indian government has carried out armed operations to restore law and order in areas dominated by the Maoists and to protect the population. Some state governments combating the Maoists, particularly in Chhattisgarh, have long subjected human rights defenders and activists to surveillance, arbitrary travel restrictions, filing of false cases, arbitrary arrests, and slander campaigns in the press. Journalists often practice self-censorship to protect themselves from government harassment. Arbitrary arrests, torture, and extrajudicial killings by government forces create a risk of fueling anger and recruiting people to the Maoist cause, Human Rights Watch said.

The population in affected areas is often caught between the Maoist combatants and government security forces. The Maoists frequently demand food or shelter at gunpoint and engage in forcible recruitment. Government forces often arrest and abuse those same villagers, claiming that they are Maoist supporters.

"The Indian government is well aware that security operations often result in increased rights abuses," Adams said. "An active and fearless civil society that monitors abuses by both sides is crucial to ensure the protection of civilians. Threats to civil society have no place in a democracy."

Authorities continue to use sedition and criminal defamation laws to prosecute citizens who criticise government officials or oppose state policies. In a blow to free speech, the government in 2016 argued before the Supreme Court in favour of retaining criminal penalties for defamation. The court upheld the law.

In the 27 cases of journalists murdered for their work in India since CPJ began keeping records in 1992, there have been no convictions. More than half of those killed reported regularly on corruption. The cases of Jagendra Singh, Umesh Rajput, and Akshay Singh, who died between 2011 and 2015, show how small-town journalists face greater risk in their reporting than those from larger outlets, and how India's culture of impunity is leaving the country's press vulnerable to threats and attacks

The government uses draconian laws such as the sedition provisions of the penal code, the criminal defamation law, and laws dealing with hate speech to silence dissent. These laws are vaguely worded, overly broad, and prone to misuse, and have been repeatedly used for political purposes against critics at the national and state level.

Despite its Constitutional commitment to free speech, India’s legal system makes it surprisingly easy to silence others. Routine corruption, inefficiency, and the selective enforcement of vague and overbroad laws allow individuals, or small groups, to censor opinions they find distasteful. - See more at: http://www.pen-international.org/the-india-report-executive-summary-and-key-findings/#sthash.TIIM2xbu.dpuf

The media in Tripura is still dependent on the government for financial help, giving them an unprecedented upper hand to control press freedom in the state. As long as the political party in power is satisfied, the media is deemed to be okay otherwise there is an incredible pressure on the journalists as they have to not only endure insults but also face demotion in rank as well as being refused accreditation. - See more at: https://samsn.ifj.org/media-in-north-eastern-state-of-tripura/#sthash.0GypROMb.dpuf

IFEX publishes original and member-produced free expression news and reports. Some member content has been edited by IFEX. We invite you to contact [email protected] to request permission to reproduce or republish in whole or in part content from this site.